The kingdom of God.

[Checkpoint]

Some seem to think it is entirely future, while others give the impression they are always thinking of it as present, and to not be looking at the future in kingdom terms at all.

Jesus had much to say about the kingdom, including this:

Luke 16:

6 The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is being zealously urged into it.

So, where do you stand as to whether it is present, future, or has both a present and a future aspect?

On what basis?

According to which scriptures?

[myth-one.com]

So the way that it did start out and continue, was "Very Good" re YHVH's Agenda.

It was "Good" enough to get the ball rolling, and gave something for humans to have to subdue.

No, we were to maintain and replenish the earth to keep it in "very good" condition.

[William]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #1328]

Adam was not created wild

That is a matter of opinion ...

Why do you think that? Are you thinking that YHVH created a wild thing re Adam? What gives you that impression?

Arguably he was as "wild"* as they come, naked and running with the animals in a natural (as in non-artificial) environment.

Do you mean, "wild, like a baby" ? If so, what makes you think the two conditions are the same thing?

I am not arguing that being wild cannot be seen to be beautiful.

Thats very astute. And what does "idyllic" mean?

I thought we had reached an agreement that as long as you are not arguing that the whole earth began as a paradise which only required a trim here and there, the whole universe can be described as a wild beauty/"idyllic"?

Otherwise, you are on a different track to me, arguing about something never said.

Are you suggesting jungles cannot be controlled?

Not without human intervention.
They do have there balance of course - naturally enough. But YHVH was interested in upsurping that balance by commissioning it to be improved upon, through human intervention.

If so why would YHVH commission the first coupled to go out and do just that?

YHVH commissioned the first humans YHVH created [in The Frist Creation Story] to subdue The Earth.

You may be confusing those first humans, with Adam and Eve? They are "the first coupled" you are referring to, correct?

Adam is of the Second Creation Story, and was not commissioned to subdue The Earth any more that 'tilling the ground' - being a farmer.

That too, requires that the land is subdued in some fashion, and lends itself nicely as a means of bring in the concept of farming for one's food, rather than following one's food around - like a wild thing.

Perhaps therein, the first humans were not getting the subduing done, because they were expending too much energy on the chase?

That is why YHVH created Eden and put Adam within it. To learn the ropes re Farming.

Today jungles do not cover the whole earth, indeed they have to be protected from being destroyed by man, so clearly their spread is containable (which is arguably what the original commission involved).

Subduing requires the ability to contain. Rather than chase it out in the wild, farm it.
Adam was contained within Eden for a time too. This make YHVH something of a Farmer too.
Also, The Earth itself can be said to be a container of sorts. Perhaps even a Farm that started out wild and is slowly and surely brought to heal...from within...

[JehovahsWitness]

... I would say that "unruly" is closer to the truth than like an idyll; extremely happy, peaceful, or picturesque place..

Well the earth (planet) can't be "happy" as happiness is an emotion and (Gaia aside) we usually reserve emotion to sentient beings, but leaving aside happy, you have yet to present a tenable argument as to why the other adjectives might not apply to the earth at the end of the 6th creative day of Genesis.



JW

[William]

So the way that it did start out and continue, was "Very Good" re YHVH's Agenda.

It was "Good" enough to get the ball rolling, and gave something for humans to have to subdue.

No, we were to maintain and replenish the earth to keep it in "very good" condition.

No. The storyline and the evidence does not support the assertion that The Earth started out in a prime condition. The whole point of subduing it was to bring that about and therein, continue to keep that condition, once it was achieved.

That is what YHVH meant by it being 'very good' - very good for that particular purpose.

[JehovahsWitness]

Adam was not created wild

That is a matter of opinion ...

Do you mean, "wild, like a baby" ?

No. wild as per the definition (provided) of wild.

WILD

(of an animal or plant) living or growing in the natural environment; not domesticated or cultivated.

Arguably he was as "wild"* as they come, naked and running with the animals in a natural (as in non-artificial) environment. I hazard a guess he first trimmed his beard and built a hammock when Eve came along ...

* not to be confused with savage

For more details please go to other posts related to...

THE GARDEN OF EDEN , ADAM and ... THE DECEPTION OF EVE

[William]

... I would say that "unruly" is closer to the truth than like an idyll; extremely happy, peaceful, or picturesque place..

Well the earth (planet) can't be "happy" as happiness is an emotion and (Gaia aside) we usually reserve emtion to sentient beings, but leaving aside happy, you have yet to present a tenable argument as to why the other adjectives might not apply to the earth at the end of the 6th creative day of Genesis.



JW

I have offered much already for the readers contemplation. The scientific evidence supports that the Earth came from a wild thing. YHVH made it that way, in order that YHVH could create within it, something which would bring it to heal.

[William]

No. wild as per the definition (provided) of wild.

When I think of wild naked kids, I can refer to the book of Lord of The Flies.

The Story of The Garden is different in that regard. Adam being naked and running around like a wild thing, is not how the story presents Adam. He was in communion with The Voice of YHVH, had everything he needed so as not to turn wild, and used his intelligence to name the other animals, and even to converse with the other animal that could talk.

So no - I don't buy into your argument that Adam was not created wild, is a "matter of opinion" ...

[William]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #1330]

The existence of flesh eating animals.
The existence of pain and suffering and death.

There is no indication such things were part of YHVH's original creation.

They must have been, because there is every indication from scientific sources which show the evidence that flesh eaters have been around on earth for millions of years - indeed - not just the eaters of animal flesh, but of vegetable flesh as well.

Eating is a big part of the whole process, also evidence in the story as YHVH mentions that in both creation stories.

To not "eat" is to "die".

[JehovahsWitness]

...the whole universe can be described as a wild beauty/"idyllic"..

I would say that ...pockets of the idyllic condition, here and there - does not equate to the whole Earth being in an "idyllic condition".

So is your point that after the 6th day of Genesis the whole UNIVERSE ( black holes, the surface of the sun...) could be described as idyllic but not the whole earth ?




Because of jungles...

[William]

...the whole universe can be described as a wild beauty/"idyllic"..

I would say that ...pockets of the idyllic condition, here and there - does not equate to the whole Earth being in an "idyllic condition".

So is your point that after the 6th day of Genesis the whole UNIVERSE ( black holes, the surface of the sun...) could be described as idyllic but not the whole earth ?




Because of jungles...

I thought you had already agreed with this, that The Earth did not start out as a paradise and your use of the words "idyllic condition" wasn't meant to be taken as such.

My argument remains unchanged that "Very Good" from YHVH's perspective means that from the human perspective, things were not in an "idyllic condition" in the sense that neither perspective meant that the whole universe which includes The Earth - was some kind of "finished paradise". It was not finished at all, otherwise YHVH would not have commissioned humans to subdue it.

You should actually understand that from the context of what I have already been saying. It is your mine-quoting which is attempting to show that I am saying something else.